Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Pretending to be the Good Guys

Warren Murphy - isn't it wonderful that the criminal moron who is our u.s. atty. general is now hooked up with al the crook sharpton and pinocchius the first, pathological liar, to try to keep alive the race hatred they have been sponsoring for so long. the wonderful part is that it mighty mean that eric holder stays on the job until after the gop takes over the senate and then this perjuring thug may be called on to justify his lawlessness. one can only pray.

Michael Mercer - He'll make his escape before the republicans are sworn in.

Muhammad Rasheed - Warren Murphy wrote: "general is now hooked up with al the crook sharpton and pinocchius the first, pathological liar, to try to keep alive the race hatred they have been sponsoring for so long."

Since the cops and their friends are the ones doing all of the killing and antagonizing along racial lines, how is it that these three can be blamed for "keeping alive race hatred?" What are they doing exactly to fan the flames of race hatred that are more potent than killing unarmed teens based on stereotypes?

Joe Brumley - That is the Agenda they are seeking.

Muhammad Rasheed - What are the goals of the "Agenda?"

Bob Napier - The unarmed teen was a felon, thug, and gangsta who was attacking a cop. Good riddance.

Muhammad Rasheed - Bob Napier wrote: "The unarmed teen was a felon, thug, and gangsta who was attacking a cop. Good riddance."

So Mike Brown isn't a felon, thug, gangster. But white people keep repeating that lie that they literally just made up based on stereotype.

Doesn't that mean that you all are the ones keeping alive racial hatred the same way you have for centuries now?

Muhammad Rasheed - The exact same way.

Muhammad Rasheed - I have no illusions about changing anybody's mind or anything equally naive, I just want to understand better. Please tell me why you act this way.

Carl L. Heifetz - I think that it would be great to have a black president, especially one with the American experience who understands how this country has progressed, who knows that it was the Republicans responsible, and understands our system of government that respond to the voters.. There are several black conservatives in the wings. I really would like to give one of them a shot at it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “I think that it would be great to have a black president…”

You’re saying that we don’t have a black president? Is this a reference to Obama’s interracial thing? If so, then it is funny that traditionally someone with “even a single drop of black blood” was ostracized, yet here, now that a black person has made it to the highest office in the land, his other side is over-emphasized. Is this what you are doing here?

Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “…especially one with the American experience who understands how this country has progressed…”

President Obama acknowledges that very progress in almost every single speech. As you know, he is a very prolific speaker. He also acknowledges -- realistically as this very thread can attest to -- that we have a lot of work to do yet.

Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “who knows that it was the Republicans responsible…”

What are you referencing here? That it was the Republicans responsible for putting him in office? Or for helping knit the racial divide and improving the lives of the black American citizens? Either way, there is a clear discrepancy based on recent history in the last 30+ years. Or are you reaching waaaayyyy back to the abolishment of slavery…?

Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “…and understands our system of government that respond to the voters..”

Is this a dig at the Executive Orders thing? Can you explain why you all ignore the fact that previous presidents used Executive Orders far more often than this president? Naturally I believe the apparent hypocrisy is racism-based, but if it genuinely is not, please explain the odd imbalance in critique.

Gojko Kasich - I don’t care what the dead perpetrator's record was prior to the day in question. The security video ALONE shows one B felony, an A misdemeanor, and a C misdemeanor. How?

I. Status of the perpetrator prior to the interaction with the officer

A. He was guilty of Robbery in the 2nd degree as a class B felony. Under Missouri law:

569.030. 1. A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree when he forcibly steals property.

2. Robbery in the second degree is a class B felony.

“Forcibly steals” is defined in 569.010:

(1) "Forcibly steals", a person "forcibly steals", and thereby commits robbery, when, in the course of stealing, as defined in section 570.030 , he uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person for the purpose of:

(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking; or

B. He was guilty of stealing as an A misdemeanor

570.030. 1. A person commits the crime of stealing if he or she appropriates property or services of another with the purpose to deprive him or her thereof, either without his or her consent or by means of deceit or coercion.

9. Any violation of this section for which no other penalty is specified in this section is a class A misdemeanor.

C. He was guilty of 3rd degree assault, as a C misdemeanor:

565.070. 1. A person commits the crime of assault in the third degree if:

(3) The person purposely places another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; or

(5) The person knowingly causes physical contact with another person knowing the other person will regard the contact as offensive or provocative; or

2. Except as provided in subsections 3 and 4 of this section, assault in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.

3. A person who violates the provisions of subdivision (3) or (5) of subsection 1 of this section is guilty of a class C misdemeanor.

II. Status of the perpetrator when interacting with the officer: An A or B felony, a C felony, and a D felony.

The initial interaction was because the perpetrator was violating Ferguson city ordinance:

Sec. 44-344. - Manner of walking along roadway.

(a) Where sidewalks are provided, it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.

(b) Where sidewalks are not provided, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall, when practicable, walk only on the left side of the roadway or its shoulder facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.

State law reference— Similar provisions, RSMo 300.405.

As mentioned, it was ALSO a violation of Missouri State Law:

300.405. 1. Where sidewalks are provided it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.

2. Where sidewalks are not provided any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall when practicable walk only on the left side of the roadway or its shoulder facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.

A. Assault on the cop, with an attempt to cause serious physical injury, is a Class A felony

565.081. 1. A person commits the crime of assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the first degree if such person attempts to kill or knowingly causes or attempts to cause serious physical injury to a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer.

7. Assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the first degree is a class A felony.

At the very least, it was a C felony:

565.082. 1. A person commits the crime of assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the second degree if such person:

(2) Knowingly causes or attempts to cause physical injury to a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer by means other than a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument;

7. Assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the second degree is a class B felony unless committed pursuant to subdivision (2), (5), (6), or (7) of subsection 1 of this section in which case it is a class C felony.

B. Trying to grab the gun

Attempting to disarm the officer was a Class C felony.

575.153. 1. A person commits the crime of disarming a peace officer, as defined in section 590.010 , or a correctional officer if such person intentionally:

(1) Removes a firearm, deadly weapon, or less-lethal weapon, to include and including any blunt impact, chemical or conducted energy devices, used in the performance of his or her official duties from the person of a peace officer or correctional officer while such officer is acting within the scope of his or her official duties; or

(2) Deprives a peace officer or correctional officer of such officer's use of a firearm, deadly weapon, or any other equipment described in subdivision (1) of this subsection while the officer is acting within the scope of his or her official duties.

2. The provisions of this section shall not apply when:

(1) The defendant does not know or could not reasonably have known that the person he or she disarmed was a peace officer or correctional officer; or

(2) The peace officer or correctional officer was engaged in an incident involving felonious conduct by the peace officer or correctional officer at the time the defendant disarmed such officer.

3. Disarming a peace officer or correctional officer is a class C felony.

C. Resisting arrest after committing the felony of disarming the officer was a D felony:

575.150. 1. A person commits the crime of resisting or interfering with arrest, detention, or stop if, knowing that a law enforcement officer is making an arrest, or attempting to lawfully detain or stop an individual or vehicle, or the person reasonably should know that a law enforcement officer is making an arrest or attempting to lawfully detain or lawfully stop an individual or vehicle, for the purpose of preventing the officer from effecting the arrest, stop or detention, the person:

(1) Resists the arrest, stop or detention of such person by using or threatening the use of violence or physical force or by fleeing from such officer; or

(2) Interferes with the arrest, stop or detention of another person by using or threatening the use of violence, physical force or physical interference.

2. This section applies to:

(2) Arrests, stops, or detentions, for any crime, infraction, or ordinance violation; and

4. It is no defense to a prosecution pursuant to subsection 1 of this section that the law enforcement officer was acting unlawfully in making the arrest. However, nothing in this section shall be construed to bar civil suits for unlawful arrest.

5. Resisting or interfering with an arrest is a class D felony for an arrest for a:

(1) Felony

Muhammad Rasheed - Gojko Kasich wrote: “I don’t care what the dead perpetrator's record was prior to the day in question.”

Convenient. That helps with the reinforcement of the stereotype in your mind, right? We all made up our minds that Mike Brown must’ve been a felon, thug and gangster… despite him not having any record of such… he just MUST’VE been because that’s what we are programmed to think about black people. We have blind faith that is how black people are. They have a monopoly on criminality based on their genetics and skin color and whatever. Eating habits maybe. So even though the figure in the security video was wearing a completely different outfit from what Mike Brown was wearing during the confrontation with Wilson, NOT ONCE do we question the cops’ word that it was him. And to be perfectly fair about it, even if it wasn’t him, he was still a black guy and we all agree that blacks are naturally savage criminals who deserve to be shot dead in the streets, whether they have an actual criminal history or not.

J.d. Charles - I think Mike Brown was a thug because he assaulted a man much smaller than him. I know he committed a misdemeanor because I saw the video of the petty theft at the store. Its got nothing to do with his skin color. Its got to do with his actions. None of the people rioting, looting or agitating since his death would have let him in their home when he was alive if they were familiar with his record. Reality Check- there are white thugs too. They get shot by the cops, their victims, other thugs, etc... Nobody ever turns that into a racial thing. I wonder why?

Muhammad Rasheed - J.d. Charles wrote: “I think Mike Brown was a thug because he assaulted a man much smaller than him.”

The owner of the store and the staff said it wasn’t him in the video. That’s not significant to you?

J.d. Charles wrote: “I know he committed a misdemeanor because I saw the video of the petty theft at the store.”

The owner said it wasn’t him on the video. He owns a neighborhood store that Mike Brown had been patronizing for his entire 18 years. You don’t think the store owner would recognize him better than the cops would? Why wouldn’t he? The ONLY thing the cops were concerned with was keeping their colleague out of trouble.

J.d. Charles wrote: “Its got nothing to do with his skin color.”

Sure it does. You WANT to believe this 18 year old with no criminal record is a thug by nature because that’s the stereotype you were programmed to believe.

J.d. Charles wrote: “Its got to do with his actions.”

The actions the cops were subscribing to him were those of another man according to the store owner and the staff.

J.d. Charles wrote: “None of the people rioting, looting or agitating since his death would have let him in their home when he was alive if they were familiar with his record.”

Why are you pretending you know what his record is when you very obviously do not? Why are you repeating a lie based on a stereotype you and your friends made up about Mike Brown, J.d.? Mike Brown didn’t have a criminal record at the time of his murder. Why are you saying that he did? The true answer is actually “racism.” Can you provide a different answer that will be more believable to the rational mind?

J.d. Charles wrote: “Reality Check- there are white thugs too.”

I know. One of them killed Mike Brown while other thugs helped lie about the murder so their friend could stay out of prison.

J.d. Charles wrote: “They get shot by the cops, their victims, other thugs, etc... Nobody ever turns that into a racial thing. I wonder why?”

Why doesn’t the public continuously bring up the high numbers of white-on-white crime the way they do the black-on-black crimes (and for the same reasons)? That’s actually an excellent question, J.d. All races do inflict violent crimes on themselves, and the white-on-white, and black-on-black numbers are roughly similar. Yet as you imply, the black-on-black crimes are continuously mentioned as if they are some special race-based issue different from white-on-white crime. Why is that? I suspect it’s because the popular media are catering to the stereotypes believed by white people, hence the reason why you keep bringing things like that up as “fact” even though it’s not true.

It is your demographic responsible for the discrepancy, because you represent the “mainstream” viewpoint in America that big business courts.

Missy Davis - JD Charles he also committed three attempts to attack and harm the officer so he was given 2 chances before he attacked the officer again and the officer had no choice. Has nothing to do with race, he was committing a crime against a office and had comitted a robbery

Missy Davis - well said J.D>

Muhammad Rasheed - Missy Davis wrote: "JD Charles he also committed three attempts to attack and harm the officer so he was given 2 chances before he attacked the officer again and the officer had no choice."

How do you know? Because the guy who was trying to stay out of prison by building a defense based on the jury's pre-programmed fear of the "big scary black guy" stereotype told you it was true? And you think it is actually reasonable to consider that realistic? This 18 year old kid who never committed a crime before suddenly began a crime spread for no other reason than because this KKK affiliated person who would say anything to stay out of prison said so? Is that right?

No comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

M. Rasheed is an independent Black American scholar, PMP®, and graphic novel serialist. He is the author of two, 10-titled, graphic novel series, TALES OF SINANJU: THE DESTROYER, and the award-winning MONSTERS 101. M. Rasheed is the founder of the #BlackActionAgenda initiative.